Jump to content

NBTA

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    965
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by NBTA

  1. 8 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

    Some more thoughts:

    Big missed opportunity not having any buses run down to the Army Ferry Terminal.

    Again, very big issue not restoring service to 16th Ave. If anything, extend the B48 down to cover that portion.

    B74 - why keep this shuttle instead of making it useful? Extend it eastward to Kingsboro C.C to make it a true crosstown service.

    Extend the B53 northward to Northern Blvd to serve that shopping complex. 

    74 doesn’t need to be anything more than a shuttle. It’s designed to serve one area, and one area only.

  2. On 12/2/2022 at 1:51 AM, B35 via Church said:

    B2/B100 (combination): Shocker.

    B4: Ok, do away with the current piecemealing along Neptune.... However, I'd rather split the Bay Ridge Pkwy. portion into its own route somehow, to still have the other portion serve CI Hospital - over running it along more of Stillwell (down to Coney Island, no less) to end up removing access to that hospital...

    B5/B6/B103: The problem with the (real) B6 & Caesars Bay Shopping ctr. is that it only serves it in the one direction (towards it).... If you're leaving from there, you're gonna be making that walk up to Bay Pkwy... Regarding the rest of the proposal involving the (real) B6, it's not at all surprising that they'd truncate locals (the proposed B6) to Canarsie (L).... However, I can't concur with having the LTD portion (as the proposed B5) run over to Gateway, to have the B103 run up to New Lots (3) in its place.... If the idea is to truncate all B103's to the Junction, then that should be the route going to Gateway.... As someone earlier in here pointed out (lol), it's interesting to take the B6 away from Caesars Bay to have it serve Gateway Mall instead.... I see that as a shot at Caesars Bay, but that's neither here nor there :lol:

    B7/B20: I'd think most will pay more of an attention to the attempted optimizing of the proposed B20, but I fully believe this part of the proposal{s} is about the B7 operating out of FP...

    B8: Having Brownsville buses make that right turn off Amboy onto Hegeman won't fly... Regardless of feasibility issues, what they're proposing on the Brownsville end will save some runtime for sure - however, I see it being detrimental for a significant amt. of riders....

    B10/B12: The B12 looks to be left alone - however, that proposed B10 is basically a B12 that runs to Prospect Park (B)(Q)(S) via Empire... I mean. great, it fills a gap, but I don't see this catching on to the tune some may think it will.... I sincerely hope that the plan isn't to take away service from the B12 to give to that B10, b/c it'd be BS if it were to AFAIC - LTD service or not.....

    B13: I get doing away with the meandrous nature of the thing in Bushwick... At the same time, I'd want noooo part of B13's (or any other route nowadays) running on Cypress.... It's almost akin to running a bus along the more eastern portion of Bushwick av, esp. proximate to the JRP...

    B14: While I would still run it to Rockaway Blvd. (A) to supplant the current Q7's stint in Brooklyn, to propose having it (the B14) divert to run up to Euclid (A)(C) before swinging back down to the Bklyn. general mail facility is a palatable idea in its own right....

    B15: If they're going to take it away from JFK to give it more coverage north of Broadway, it should, at minimum, run to Grand st..... Having it stop dead at Montrose (L) is a stub.

    B16: The only thing I agree with here, is the having of it serve Church av (F)(G).... The running of this thing on 60th, the running of it east of Parkside (Q) to Utica/Clarkson, good lord.... Having this swing over to Utica for supplemental service along Clarkson to me (considering what they're doing along Church) reeks of damage control/mitigative measures - considering their lovely plan for Church av <_<

    B26: LMAO.... You're not going to get anything "rush"(ing) along narrow Halsey st.... Better off choosing the B52/Gates av for that purpose...

    B27: ...but Fort Hamilton Pkwy doesn't get its own route, man GTFOH with this.... A Court/Smith st split of the current B57 that'd stop dead at the goddamn Farragut houses???? This wouldn't have to have been a thought in anyone's mind for supplemental service b/w those PJ's & Downtown Brooklyn if the B62 weren't running up to the Astoria houses... How 'bout we run this to City Hall instead :D

    B36: Never understood why it didn't end at Surf/W. 37th (at the actual gate of Sea Gate) to begin with.... Thank f*** they didn't resort to the age-old proposal around these parts to extending it to (either) Kings Plaza or the Junction....

    B38: Not surprising that they're proposing canning the Met. av branch... With that said, there is no way you're having every single B38 trip under those headways terminating around Seneca/Cornelia <> Seneca/Catalpa.... Something will have to give.

    B40: I'm not convinced this route actually has anything to do with being some sort of an improvement to rush hour service...

    B41XT: Nice gesture I suppose, but I'd say It's way too late for something like this.... The damage has been done with the B41 (in general)... Something like this should've been done before the PBL takeover, let alone before major improvements were done to the B103 (that made it as popular as it is today) not too long after the takeover.... Back when the B41 was far more popular than it is today... Proposing scaling the B103 back to the Junction won't make something like this more attractive than the current B103 to/from Downtown Brooklyn (if that's supposed to be the idea with this)...

    =========================

     

    guess I'll finish the rest of this some other time....

    You probably already saw it, but the proposed 103 and the B6 Limited are gonna run to New Lots (3), while overnight, the B6 local will be extended to it. 

  3. 11 hours ago, dremoney9972 said:

    The person who took and looked over my application said you don't need a driver's license for engineer, I think it's more a matter of being able to get to the jobs wherever and when you need to be there, but it's not in the job description as necessary. 

    They lied to some of the people that failed then. Also, if you are in a unionized position that has you locked in for a period of time (for me, it’s one year), they’ll dismiss you, but your application and test scores are still valid, which means they’ll bring you in after your probation is over. So for those who are still in probation but want to take the test, do so, because you’ll be in quicker than you think.

  4. 2 hours ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:

    The schedule during the pm rush has the buses arriving every 5-8 minutes if you combine both route frequencies. I do think this is bad dispatching as I can’t think of where the chokepoints for those routes are along Gun Hill Road. I’ve seen a similar problem with Bx3 buses during the midday and rush hours where there are 30-40 minute gaps in service. Only during the past few weeks has the route now seen dispatchers active at the terminals to see what is going on.

    The 3 is horrible when it comes to bunching..but the 28/38 issue, is due to Bainbridge and the hospital. It can get real bunch heavy over there. 

  5. On 11/11/2022 at 11:29 AM, drenyce311 said:

    For engineer? I believe so. For conductor I don’t think so. Our drivers license is tied with our Engineer License. If for anytime your DL gets suspended or revoked. So does your EL

    It’s the reverse on the website, I genuinely don’t think that you need your license. But if you do (at least your permit), it would be beneficial.

  6. 1 hour ago, Transit Enthusiast said:

    #1224 Gun Hill confirmed retired

    The first 2009-10 Novabus LFS Articulated to officially retire due to age and mileage (not counting #1201 and #1205 that were lost to fires years ago)

     

    It’s not confirmed yet. Also, buses could not run for a while due to maintenance and upgrades for the bus. If they don’t run past Labor Day (especially the “since March” buses, then that can raise speculation.

    But if this is true, then it’s time to question some more of the novas, 5853/54 (hasn’t ran since June), 5863/71/97, (hasn’t ran since July), and 5920 (hasn’t ran since July) are all sitting ducks right now.

  7. 7 hours ago, Krocyoin said:

    b2ea89819b53c567bb95b3d8ec6adf9c.png

    Not only is this map proposal is super out there, you still have a big transit dessert, there is zero North-South Queens local routes between Springfield Blvd and Little Neck Pkwy. Northeast Queens needs better treatment and well like the MTA themselves, you ignored this area of Queens. 

    So you want service on Douglaston Parkway? I don’t think there’s a demand for that. “If you create the line the demand will increase”, I don't think it will.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.